Author: John Hollis

GLA Intelligence Unit City Hall Queen's Walk More London SE1 2AA London

intelligence@london.gov.uk 020 7983 4658

Follow us on Twitter at: http://www.twitter.com/GLAIntelligence

This report is available on the London Datastore at: http://data.london.gov.uk/datastore/applications/ focus-london-population-and-migration

Contains Ordnance Survey data © Crown copyright and database rights 2010.

ISSN 1479-7879 Introduction

London is the United Kingdom’s only city region. Its population of 7.75 million is 12.5 per cent of the UK population living on just 0.6 per cent of the land area. The average population density is over 4,900 persons per square kilometre, this is ten times that of the second most densely populated region, the North West. London is second to the South East in terms of the size of its population, which is larger than that of Scotland and Northern Ireland combined (Table 1).

Between 2001 and 2009 London’s population grew by over 430 thousand, more than any other region, accounting for over 16 per cent of the UK increase. Only the East and East Midlands regions grew more rapidly than London’s 5.9 per cent over the eight years (Table 2).

| Table 1: Mid-Year Population Estimates, 2009 | |---------------------------------------------| | Number | % | | South East | 8,435,700 | 13.7 | | **London** | **7,753,600** | **12.5** | | North West | 6,897,900 | 11.2 | | East | 5,766,600 | 9.3 | | West Midlands | 5,431,100 | 8.8 | | Yorkshire & the Humber | 5,258,100 | 8.5 | | South West | 5,231,200 | 8.5 | | Scotland | 5,194,000 | 8.4 | | East Midlands | 4,451,200 | 7.2 | | Wales | 2,999,300 | 4.9 | | North East | 2,584,300 | 4.2 | | Northern Ireland | 1,788,900 | 2.9 |

| Table 2: Increase in Mid-Year Population Estimates, 2001-2009 | |---------------------------------------------------------------| | Number | % | | London | 431,200 | 5.9 | | South East | 412,300 | 5.1 | | East | 366,200 | 6.8 | | South West | 287,900 | 5.8 | | Yorkshire & the Humber | 281,500 | 5.7 | | East Midlands | 261,600 | 6.2 | | West Midlands | 150,400 | 2.8 | | Scotland | 129,800 | 2.6 | | North West | 124,900 | 1.8 | | Northern Ireland | 99,600 | 5.9 | | Wales | 89,100 | 3.1 | | North East | 44,200 | 1.7 |

Source: Office for National Statistics, mid-year estimates. The mid-2009 estimate of London’s population showed that there were 7,753,600 residents accounting for 12.5% of total UK population.

Between 2001 and 2009 London’s population increased by 431,200 people accounting for over 16% of the UK increase.

Natural change accounted for 510,000 new Londoners over the 2001-2009 period.

Between 2001-2009 London attracted 1,380,000 migrants from Overseas and 1,460,000 from the rest of the UK. Of those leaving London 2,100,000 went to the rest of the UK and only 820,000 went Overseas.

The net inflow from Overseas was 560,000 thousand and the net loss to the rest of the UK was 640,000.

In 2008-09 natural change led to 78,000 more Londoners compared to only 8,000 due to migration.

In 2008 55% of births in London were to women born outside the UK.

Four of the top five inter-regional flows in the UK are to or from London.

In 2001-02 of all inter-regional flows London only had a net inflow from the North East. In 2008-09 London had net gains from all regions except for East, South East and South West.

The only age group with a net inflow to London from the rest of the UK is the 20-29 age group.

Since 2001 London has seen its share of total immigration to the UK fall from around 37 to 28 per cent.

The number of immigrants coming to the UK from the Twelve EU Accession countries and obtaining a National Insurance Number increased from 11,300 in 2002/03 to 74,400 in 2008/09. In the same time span the number of asylum seekers fell from 37,700 to 8,900.

Between 2011 and 2031 London’s population is projected to increase by 13% and reach 8,828,800 people. Population Age Structure

Since 2001 the growth in London’s population has been concentrated in two age ranges; 0-6 and 37-52 (Chart 1). There has been a significant rise in the annual number of births since 2001 that accounts for the increase amongst the very young. The increase in the older range is mainly an artefact of the ageing of the large number of residents aged 29-44 in 2001, many of whom had been part of the large British birth cohorts of the 1960s. There has been a noticeable decline in the number of children aged seven to 16, also reflecting past trends in births and the tendency for families with younger children to move away from London. The young age structure of London with a very noticeable peak of population around the late 20s and early 30s is in marked contrast to the age structure of the UK as a whole.

There are relatively few people in the UK at age 32 – reflecting the lowest recent birth numbers recorded in 1977 – yet this is one of the largest cohorts resident in London (Chart 2, p.6). Beyond age 45 London has relatively fewer residents at all ages, particularly so from the late 50s. The average age of a Londoner is 37 compared with 40 for the UK as a whole. There is an even larger difference comparing median ages (that is the age where half the population is older and half younger) with London at 34 and the UK at 39.

London’s age structure is a legacy of the migration changes that have occurred over the last few decades with young migrants arriving in the capital while more mature workers with families and persons around retirement age leave. The age structure also influences the annual numbers of events and the statistical measures of fertility and mortality. This is discussed in later sections.

The mid-2009 populations of the London boroughs are shown with broad age groupings in the Annex (Table 16, p.25). Newham had proportionally nearly twice the child population of Westminster while Havering had more than twice the retirement age population of Tower Hamlets. The main working ages as a whole were distributed more evenly ranging from Havering with just over 60 per cent to Westminster with over 74 per cent. However the age structures within this broad grouping also showed distinct borough characteristics with a younger profile in inner London boroughs.

Chart 1: Population Age Structure, London, 2001 and 2009, thousands

Source: Office for National Statistics, mid-year estimates Components of Change

When separating out the main components of London’s recent population increase, in purely numerical terms, it is natural change (births less deaths) that has had the major influence (Chart 3, p.7). Not only has natural change accounted for a 510 thousand increase over the eight years, it has increased its contribution year-on-year from 47 thousand in 2001-02 to 78 thousand in 2008-09. This change is a combination of a 23 thousand (22 per cent) increase in births and a reduction of eight thousand deaths. In recent years London has contributed a substantial share of natural change in the UK. In 2008-09 this was 36 per cent, compared with its 12.5 per cent share of the UK population. London’s share has declined in recent years as the numbers of births have increased in all parts of the UK.

In the last eight years London’s overall net migration has been a loss of over 80 thousand, but this single statistic not only obscures the huge volumes of inflows and outflows but also the balance between migrants within the UK and those to and from Overseas. In this period the average annual inflow to London has been 356 thousand, with 366 thousand persons leaving. This means that on average 4.7 per cent of London’s residents lived elsewhere a year earlier.

Between 2001 and 2009 London attracted 1.38 million migrants from Overseas and 1.46 million from the rest of the UK. Of those leaving London 2.10 million went to the rest of the UK and only 820 thousand went Overseas. The net inflow from Overseas was 560 thousand and the net loss to the rest of the UK was 640 thousand. In the last two years the inflow from Overseas has fallen to the lowest levels in the decade while the, more volatile, outflow has increased. In 2008-09 the net international inflow was less than half of its level in 2001-02. The net loss from London to the rest of the UK was also at a recent low level in 2008-09 as a result of a sharp drop in the outflow from London and the inflow reaching record levels. The annual net loss is at less than a third of its level in 2002-04 and is less than half of the level in 2007-08. The recent changes in migration flows are discussed in more detail on page 10.

All boroughs had more births than deaths in 2008-09 and in the majority natural change had an higher absolute impact on overall population change than net migration (Table 3, p.8). The eight exceptions include only two – Kensington & Chelsea and Newham - where a net migration loss exceeded the natural increase.

As would be expected from the migration flows for London, the majority of boroughs – 18 - gain population from international flows and lose through internal flows.

However eight boroughs gain from both internal and international flows while three – Kensington & Chelsea, Lambeth and Southwark – have been estimated to have lost to both. Overall only two boroughs are estimated to have lost population in 2008-09 – Kensington & Chelsea and Newham. Since 2001 the populations of all boroughs have been estimated to have increased except for Brent and Newham.

In 2008-09 natural change had an overall higher impact on London’s population than migration.

### Table 3: Annual Mid-year Estimate Change Analysis, London boroughs, 2008-09, thousands

| Borough | Population mid-2008 | Natural Change | Migration | Total Change | Population mid-2009 | |-------------------------------|---------------------|----------------|-----------|--------------|---------------------| | | | Births | Deaths | Net | Internal (UK) | | International | Total | Net | Change | | | | | In | Out | Net | In | Out | Net | In | Out | Net | | | City of London | 11.3 | 0.1 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.9 | 0.8 | 0.1 | 0.7 | 0.6 | 0.1 | 0.2 | 11.5 | | Barking and Dagenham | 171.5 | 3.7 | 1.4 | 2.3 | 11.1 | 10.7 | 0.4 | 2.6 | 1.1 | 1.5 | 1.9 | 4.1 | 175.6 | | Barnet | 338.1 | 5.2 | 2.4 | 2.8 | 20.7 | 20.1 | 0.6 | 5.9 | 4.2 | 1.7 | 2.3 | 5.0 | 343.1 | | Bexley | 225.0 | 2.9 | 2.0 | 1.0 | 9.7 | 10.0 | -0.3 | 0.9 | 0.6 | 0.3 | 0.3 | 0.9 | 225.9 | | Brent | 254.5 | 5.0 | 1.6 | 3.4 | 17.0 | 22.2 | -5.2 | 6.6 | 3.8 | 2.8 | -2.4 | 1.0 | 255.5 | | Bromley | 308.0 | 4.0 | 2.6 | 1.3 | 14.6 | 13.9 | 0.8 | 1.4 | 1.3 | 0.0 | 0.8 | 2.1 | 310.2 | | Camden | 226.5 | 3.1 | 1.1 | 1.9 | 21.4 | 22.2 | -0.8 | 10.3 | 6.7 | 3.6 | 2.8 | 4.8 | 231.2 | | Croydon | 341.2 | 5.2 | 2.5 | 2.8 | 17.8 | 20.0 | -2.1 | 4.3 | 3.1 | 1.3 | -0.9 | 1.6 | 342.8 | | Ealing | 312.1 | 5.5 | 1.9 | 3.6 | 21.4 | 23.3 | -1.9 | 8.8 | 6.0 | 2.8 | 0.9 | 4.5 | 316.6 | | Enfield | 289.0 | 4.9 | 2.1 | 2.8 | 16.5 | 18.3 | -1.7 | 2.7 | 1.6 | 1.1 | -0.6 | 2.2 | 291.2 | | Greenwich | 223.7 | 4.4 | 1.7 | 2.8 | 14.8 | 17.6 | -2.8 | 5.1 | 2.5 | 2.7 | -0.1 | 2.4 | 226.1 | | Hackney | 212.8 | 4.4 | 1.1 | 3.3 | 18.0 | 18.8 | -0.8 | 3.5 | 2.9 | 0.6 | -0.2 | 3.2 | 216.0 | | Hammersmith and Fulham | 168.6 | 2.7 | 0.9 | 1.8 | 17.3 | 17.2 | 0.1 | 5.2 | 6.1 | -0.9 | -0.8 | 1.1 | 169.7 | | Haringey | 225.3 | 4.2 | 1.1 | 3.1 | 18.6 | 22.0 | -3.4 | 3.9 | 3.4 | 0.5 | -2.9 | 0.2 | 225.5 | | Harrow | 225.4 | 3.3 | 1.4 | 1.8 | 13.8 | 14.7 | -0.9 | 3.6 | 1.8 | 1.9 | 1.0 | 2.8 | 228.1 | | Havering | 212.3 | 2.7 | 2.2 | 0.5 | 9.7 | 8.3 | 1.5 | 0.6 | 0.7 | -0.1 | 1.4 | 1.8 | 234.1 | | Hillingdon | 258.1 | 4.1 | 1.9 | 2.3 | 15.6 | 15.2 | 0.4 | 3.6 | 1.8 | 1.8 | 2.3 | 4.5 | 262.5 | | Hounslow | 230.2 | 4.2 | 1.4 | 2.8 | 15.7 | 17.5 | -1.8 | 6.8 | 3.8 | 3.0 | 1.2 | 4.0 | 234.2 | | Islington | 188.5 | 2.9 | 1.1 | 1.8 | 21.4 | 20.6 | 0.8 | 5.3 | 4.5 | 0.7 | 1.6 | 3.4 | 191.8 | | Kensington and Chelsea | 171.1 | 2.2 | 0.8 | 1.4 | 11.2 | 12.2 | -0.9 | 6.1 | 7.7 | -1.6 | -2.6 | -1.2 | 169.9 | | Kingston upon Thames | 164.6 | 2.3 | 1.0 | 1.3 | 12.0 | 12.5 | -0.5 | 3.2 | 1.8 | 1.4 | 0.9 | 2.1 | 166.7 | | Lambeth | 281.4 | 4.8 | 1.6 | 3.2 | 28.4 | 29.4 | -1.0 | 6.0 | 6.3 | -0.3 | -1.3 | 1.9 | 283.3 | | Lewisham | 262.0 | 4.8 | 1.7 | 3.1 | 20.0 | 21.2 | -1.2 | 3.5 | 2.9 | 0.6 | -0.6 | 2.5 | 264.5 | | Merton | 202.8 | 3.4 | 1.2 | 2.2 | 14.7 | 15.4 | -0.6 | 5.4 | 3.3 | 2.1 | 1.5 | 3.7 | 206.4 | | Newham | 242.4 | 5.9 | 1.4 | 4.5 | 16.1 | 23.9 | -7.9 | 5.4 | 3.3 | 2.2 | -5.7 | -1.2 | 241.2 | | Redbridge | 263.8 | 4.1 | 1.8 | 2.3 | 17.2 | 16.4 | 0.8 | 3.4 | 2.6 | 0.8 | 1.6 | 3.9 | 267.7 | | Richmond upon Thames | 187.2 | 2.8 | 1.1 | 1.7 | 13.1 | 12.6 | 0.5 | 2.4 | 2.8 | -0.4 | 0.1 | 1.8 | 189.0 | | Southwark | 283.0 | 5.0 | 1.5 | 3.5 | 23.3 | 26.3 | -3.1 | 6.4 | 4.3 | 2.2 | -0.9 | 2.6 | 285.6 | | Sutton | 189.5 | 2.7 | 1.4 | 1.3 | 10.3 | 9.0 | 1.4 | 1.2 | 1.0 | 0.1 | 1.5 | 2.8 | 192.2 | | Tower Hamlets | 226.8 | 4.2 | 1.1 | 3.1 | 20.3 | 19.3 | 1.1 | 8.6 | 4.9 | 3.7 | 4.8 | 7.9 | 234.8 | | Waltham Forest | 221.4 | 4.5 | 1.5 | 3.1 | 13.8 | 16.6 | -2.8 | 5.5 | 2.8 | 2.7 | -0.2 | 2.9 | 224.3 | | Wandsworth | 283.7 | 5.3 | 1.6 | 3.7 | 30.1 | 29.2 | 0.9 | 6.4 | 8.1 | -1.7 | -0.8 | 2.9 | 286.6 | | Westminster | 246.6 | 2.9 | 1.1 | 1.9 | 19.7 | 21.1 | -1.4 | 10.8 | 8.4 | 2.4 | 1.0 | 2.8 | 249.4 | | London | 7,668.3 | 127.7 | 49.3 | 78.5 | 546.5 | 578.4 | -31.9 | 156.2 | 116.7 | 39.6 | 7.6 | 85.2 | 7,753.6 |

Source: Office for National Statistics Fertility and Mortality

As discussed above natural change is the biggest driver of London’s total population change, and it plays a significant part in UK population growth.

Looking first at fertility, in 2008-09 London contributed 16.2 per cent of all UK births, however its recent fertility profile is little different to that of the UK (Table 4). The simplest reference measure for fertility is the crude birth rate – births per thousand resident population. By this measure fertility in London was much higher than in the UK (16.7 compared with 12.9 in 2008). A more subtle measure is the general fertility rate (GFR) - births per thousand resident women aged 15-44. Even here London is ahead of the UK at 69 compared to 63. However, it is age-specific fertility rates (ASFR) and the total fertility rate (TFR - the estimated lifetime births per woman based on current age-specific rates) that reveal the underlying differences between London and the UK. London exhibits age-specific fertility rates a little lower than the UK at ages below 35 but much higher rates for older women, however the total fertility rates of the two areas are extremely close (1.95 for London and 1.96 for the UK).

| Age Group | 1991 UK | 1991 London | 2008 UK | 2008 London | |-----------|---------|-------------|---------|-------------| | \<20 | 33 | 29 | 26 | 23 | | 20-24 | 89 | 69 | 74 | 68 | | 25-29 | 120 | 97 | 108 | 89 | | 30-34 | 87 | 96 | 113 | 110 | | 35-39 | 32 | 47 | 58 | 78 | | 40+ | 5 | 10 | 12 | 21 | | General Fertility Rate¹ | 64 | 64 | 63 | 69 | | Total Fertility Rate² | 1.82 | 1.72 | 1.96 | 1.95 | | Crude Birth Rate³ | 13.8 | 15.5 | 12.9 | 16.7 | | Total Births (000s) | 792.3 | 105.8 | 794.4 | 127.7 |

¹ Births per thousand resident women aged 15-44. ² Estimated lifetime births per woman based on current age-specific rates. ³ Births per thousand resident population.

The total number of births in London reflects not just the high proportion of women aged 15-44, but also the distribution of those women in the ages of the highest fertility, the late 20s and early 30s.

It is interesting to compare fertility measures for 1991 with 2008 as there were almost the same numbers of births, just over 790 thousand, in the UK in each year. However in London births rose from 106 thousand to 128 thousand. Both the crude birth rates and general fertility rates are higher in London, but in London the rates have risen while in the UK they have fallen. The age-specific fertility rates show a consistent change with the highest rates being at 30-34, rather than 25-29, increases at the older age groups and declines amongst the younger. At the ages where fertility declined, the UK rates fell more rapidly than London, while at ages where fertility has increased the UK rates rose faster than London. In London the greatest contribution to fertility is now being made by women aged over 30, but in the UK as a whole the greatest contribution is still being made by those below 30. The summation of these measures is the TFR. In London it has increased from 1.72 to 1.95, while in the UK the rise has been less rapid from 1.82 to 1.96. These apparent paradoxes in the fertility measures reflect the separate changes in the age structures of London and the UK – London has become more extreme with the proportion of women aged 15-44, and especially 25-34, increasing compared with relative declines in the UK.

A major contributor to the increased numbers of young women in London is international migration. This is reflected in the birth statistics for 2008 (Chart 4, p.10) when nearly 55 per cent of births in London were to women born outside the UK. On this measure London was the highest region and the only one to have more than the England & Wales average of 24 per cent. Of all local authorities only Slough has a higher level than London – 56 per cent – but 15 individual London boroughs had higher proportions than Slough, led by Newham and Brent at over 70 per cent. London had 41 per cent of all births to women born outside the UK that occurred in England & Wales. This compared to just 11 per cent of births to UK-born women. In London most of the ‘non-UK’ births were to women from Africa (21 thousand) and Asia (20 thousand). While in London the young age structure leads to a relatively high number of births the reverse is true for deaths (Table 5). London’s crude death rate in 2008 was only 6.6 (per thousand resident population) compared with 9.4 for the United Kingdom. The most straightforward way of measuring relative mortality between areas is the standardised mortality ratio (SMR) which compares actual recorded deaths in an area to the number that would have occurred if the standard (in this case, UK) age-specific mortality rates applied in each locality. For London the SMR is 92, implying that age-specific mortality rates are on average 8 per cent lower than for the UK as a whole. In 2008 London only had higher mortality rates for males at ages 45-64 and for females at 1-4 and 45-54. Over age 65, where mortality rates are highest, London has significantly better survivorship.

Note: The ‘European Union - new countries’ constitutes the twelve countries which have joined the European Union since 2004. The ‘European Union - old 15’ comprises of fifteen member states which joined before 2004.

Source: Office for National Statistics

Table 5: Mortality Measures, United Kingdom and London, 2008, rates per thousand people

| | 0 | 1-4 | 5-15 | 16-24 | 25-34 | 35-44 | 45-54 | 55-64 | 65-74 | 75-84 | 85+ | SMR² | CDR³ | |-------|---|-----|------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-----|------|------| | Males | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | UK | 5.2| 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.6 | 1.0 | 1.8 | 3.2 | 8.8 | 22.7 | 62.2 | 162.6| 100 | - | | London| 4.7| 0.2 | 0.1 | 0.5 | 0.6 | 1.4 | 3.5 | 9.3 | 22.5 | 57.0 | 144.5| 93 | - | | Females | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | UK | 4.2| 0.2 | 0.1 | 0.2 | 0.5 | 1.1 | 2.1 | 5.7 | 14.6 | 45.0 | 146.6| 100 | - | | London| 3.8| 0.3 | 0.1 | 0.2 | 0.3 | 0.9 | 2.1 | 5.1 | 13.6 | 40.6 | 133.6| 91 | - | | All | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | UK | 4.7| 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.4 | 0.8 | 1.5 | 2.6 | 7.2 | 18.4 | 52.3 | 151.6| 100 | 9.4 | | London| 4.3| 0.2 | 0.1 | 0.4 | 0.5 | 1.1 | 2.8 | 7.1 | 17.7 | 47.5 | 137.3| 92 | 6.6 |

¹ Deaths of infants under one year of age per 1,000 live births. ² Standardised mortality rate (SMR) is the ratio of observed deaths to those expected by applying a standard death rate to the area’s population. ³ Crude death rate.

Source: Office for National Statistics Migration

The importance of migration in shaping London’s population should not be underestimated even if the combined net impact of UK and international migration has, in recent years, generally been negative. London is the hub for migration flows into and within the UK. This section will show the importance of London as the main focus of international migration to the UK as well as a magnet for students and young workers from the rest of the UK. London then becomes the main source of family and retirement migrants to the rest of the UK.

Internal Migration

This section considers migration within the UK at country and English regional level. The main source of data on long term trends of inter-regional migration is people re-registering with general practitioners (GPs). To partly overcome problems of late re-registration of young adults, ONS has recently added an analysis of moving students to enhance internal migration in the annual mid-year estimate change analysis – see p.6. However, here the GP re-registrations are considered independently based on the annualised tabulations available each quarter.

Figure 1: Ten Largest Interregional Flows in the UK, Year to December 2009

01. London to South East: 84k
02. South East to London: 57k
03. London to East: 54k
04. South East to South West: 39k
05. East to London: 32k
06. South West to South East: 32k
07. East to South East: 27k
08. South East to East: 24k
09. London to South West: 19k
10. North West to Yorks & Humber: 19k

Source: National Health Service Central Register

The 2001 Census showed that over two-thirds of moves in the UK were of less than 10 kilometres therefore it is not surprising that inter-regional moves between the UK’s only city-region and its two neighbours, the East and South East, should be four of the top five inter-regional flows (Figure 1). In excess of two million Londoners live in boroughs that have boundaries with each of these regions; therefore many short distance radial moves away from the centre of London will have destinations in the adjacent regions (Chart 5). Inter-regional migration is largely concentrated in the greater South East with the nine largest flows having at least one of London, the East or South East as an origin or destination and all six flows between the three regions being in the top ten. Table 6: Internal Migration Flows to and from London, Countries of the UK and English Regions, selected years, thousands of people

| Region | 2001-02 | 2006-07 | Year to Dec. 2009 | |-------------------------------|---------|---------|------------------| | | In | Out | Net | In | Out | Net | | United Kingdom | 156.0 | 254.2 | -98.2 | 167.0 | 248.4 | -81.4 | | England | 142.4 | 238.6 | -96.2 | 154.5 | 234.5 | -80.0 | | North East | 4.7 | 4.5 | 0.2 | 4.8 | 3.9 | 0.9 | | North West | 12.3 | 13.0 | -0.7 | 12.2 | 11.9 | 0.3 | | Yorkshire and The Humber | 9.9 | 10.6 | -0.7 | 10.8 | 9.8 | 1.0 | | East Midlands | 10.1 | 14.7 | -4.6 | 11.4 | 12.4 | -1.0 | | West Midlands | 11.4 | 12.8 | -1.4 | 12.3 | 12.1 | 0.2 | | East | 28.4 | 65.1 | -36.7 | 30.8 | 64.9 | -34.1 | | South East | 50.6 | 93.9 | -43.3 | 55.9 | 97.1 | -41.2 | | South West | 15.0 | 24.1 | -9.1 | 16.3 | 22.4 | -6.1 | | Wales | 4.9 | 5.8 | -0.9 | 5.0 | 5.3 | -0.3 | | Scotland | 7.3 | 7.8 | -0.5 | 6.2 | 6.9 | -0.7 | | Northern Ireland | 1.4 | 2.0 | -0.6 | 1.3 | 1.8 | -0.5 |

Source: Office for National Statistics

Chart 6: Annualised¹ Internal Migration Flows, London, Quarterly to December 2009, thousands

¹12 months up to a given period, for example the December 2009 figure refers to the January - December 2009 period.

Source: National Health Service Central Register The changing migration flows to and from London since 2001-02 are illustrated in Table 6 (p.12). Nearly all of the highest flows to London have occurred in the latest period, while, with the exception of the South East, all of the greatest outflows occurred at the earliest period. In 2001-02 London only had a net inflow from the North East but in the year to December 2009 London had net gains from all regions except the East, South East and South West. However, the small gains are swamped by the losses to the South East (25 thousand) and East (22 thousand). Overall London’s net loss was 38 thousand. The net loss from London has not traditionally been this low (Chart 6, p.12) Current levels are the lowest for twenty years and the net loss was as high as 116 thousand as recently as 2004.

The most significant changes have taken place over between June 2007 and December 2009. The outflow from London has fallen by over 13 per cent while the inflow increased by 7 per cent to reach new record levels since GP registrations were used to estimated internal migration in the 1980s (Table 7). The recent changes have their roots in the period of economic uncertainty. In the UK as a whole, inter-regional moves declined by 6 per cent between the years ending June 2007 and December 2009. Most people leaving London for other parts of the UK are moving into owner occupation. The increased difficulty in obtaining a mortgage has limited the ability of many families to leave London. At the same time there has been an increase in participation in higher education and the London job market for young workers has not been as affected as much as other parts of the country, hence the only inter-regional flows that have increased over the last two years have been those with destinations in London. Most of the people moving to London are young and will look for accommodation in the expanding private renting sector.

Table 7: Internal Migration, changes in selected flows between June 2007 and December 2009, percentages

| From: | East | London | South East | Rest of UK | Total | |------|------|--------|------------|------------|-------| | East | 3.6 | -8.9 | -11.1 | -7.0 | | | London | -17.3 | -13.9 | -8.7 | -13.0 | | | South East | -7.3 | 1.8 | -13.2 | -8.3 | | | Rest of UK | -3.3 | 9.8 | -4.5 | 1.7 | | | Total | -9.7 | 6.6 | -8.9 | -7.5 | -6.1 |

Source: Office for National Statistics

Chart 7: Annualised Net Internal Migration from London to East, South East and the Rest of the UK, Quarterly to December 2009, thousands

Source: National Health Service Central Register Chart 8: Internal Migration Flows by Age, London, Year to December 2009, thousands

Source: National Health Service Central Register

Chart 9: Internal Migration Flows by Age, London, differences between years ending September 2007 and December 2009, percentages

Source: National Health Service Central Register The impacts of the recent changes in migration are illustrated by the net flows between London and the East, the South East and the Rest of UK since 2001 (Chart 7, p.13). The net losses from London to the East and the South East both peaked in 2004 and were both flat between 2005 and the end of 2008. After which they fell dramatically to around half of the 2004 values by mid-2009. On the other hand London’s relationship with the Rest of the UK has completely turned around. From losses of 30 thousand in 2004 there has been a decline in almost every subsequent quarter leading to a net inflow to London in the year ending September 2008 and a net flow to London of 11 thousand in the year to September 2009.

The inflow to London is dominated by people aged 20-29, the only ages at which there is also a net inflow (Chart 8, p.14). Few school-age children and people over 50 move to London. The age-profile of the outflow is less extreme having a significant number of pre-school children as well as all ages between 15 and 39. The largest net losses are seen at 0-4, 15-19 and 30-44.

Comparing the latest flows by age, with those in the year to September 2007 (Chart 9, p.14) shows that the increased inflows are, proportionally, fairly evenly spread at all ages below 55, with reductions in the relatively small flows at higher ages. Although overall there was a reduction in the outflow there were some increases in the late teens and early twenties, possibly as a result of more Londoners going to university outside London. The greatest proportional reductions in the outflow are at ages around and above retirement. Although the retirement moves away from London are relatively small, 23 thousand persons aged over 55 compared to 31 thousand at ages 20-29.

The only age group with a net inflow to London from the rest of the UK is the 20-29 age group.

Table 8: Internal Migration, the Three Largest Inter-regional Flows from each Region of Origin, Year to December 2009, thousands

| Region of Origin | Largest Region of Destination | Flow (000s) | 2nd Largest Region of Destination | Flow (000s) | 3rd Largest Region of Destination | Flow (000s) | Average Top 3 Flow (000s) | |------------------|-------------------------------|------------|-----------------------------------|------------|-----------------------------------|------------|--------------------------| | London | S East | 83.6 | East | 53.7 | S West | 19.4 | 52.2 | | South East | London | 56.9 | S West | 39.1 | East | 24.1 | 40.0 | | East | London | 31.9 | S East | 26.7 | E Mids | 15.6 | 24.7 | | South West | S East | 31.8 | London | 17.9 | W Mids | 11.4 | 20.4 | | East Midlands | Yorks & H | 15.7 | W Mids | 14.0 | S East | 13.5 | 14.4 | | West Midlands | E Mids | 15.5 | S West | 14.4 | London | 14.3 | 14.7 | | Yorkshire & the Humber | N West | 18.0 | E Mids | 17.2 | London | 12.5 | 15.9 | | North West | Yorks & H | 18.6 | London | 13.7 | W Mids | 11.4 | 14.6 | | North East | Yorks & H | 9.1 | N West | 5.8 | London | 5.3 | 6.7 | | Wales | S West | 9.4 | N West | 8.3 | W Mids | 7.2 | 8.3 | | Scotland | London | 6.6 | N West | 5.9 | S East | 5.6 | 6.0 | | Northern Ireland | N West | 2.2 | Scotland | 2.1 | London | 1.3 | 1.9 |

Grey background flows are between non-contiguous regions.

Source: National Health Service Central Register 25-29, this group includes people who realise some of the capital locked up in their London properties to part-fund their retirement. The length and depth of the economic downturn may mean that for some of these people the move away from London will never happen. This would have knock-on effects on the NHS and London borough social services in future years, when there is already expected to be a significant growth in London’s elderly population.

Migration changes at the pre-school ages (0-4) have recently contributed to exacerbating the impact of the rise in births since 2001 on the education services of London boroughs. The absolute decline in the outflow, even with a rising population of under-5s, coupled with the increase in the inflow has reduced the expected net outflow from London of children aged 0 to 4. Therefore reception class places have been oversubscribed in several boroughs and most boroughs are catering for more children than were expected. The ONS mid-year estimates show that between 2005 and 2009 the number of 4-year olds in London rose by nearly 15 thousand, while the number of births in London which gave rise to these cohorts had increased by just over 10 thousand.

Table 8 (p.15) illustrates the dominance of London as the hub of migration between the UK’s regions. It shows the three largest flows from each region starting with the flows from London to the South East, East and South West. It then picks out the three main destinations of flows from those three regions. This brings in two additional regions, the East Midlands and the West Midlands. The East Midlands brings in Yorkshire and the Humber, which then adds the North West to the cascade. This successive process fails to show any strong links with the North East nor with Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. At successive stages of the cascade the average of the three largest flows also declines, from over 50 thousand from London to two thousand from, small and geographically isolated, Northern Ireland. The populations of the North East, Wales and Northern Ireland are significantly lower than those of Scotland and the other regions, therefore outflows from these areas are expected to be lower. Flows between non-contiguous regions are indicated by a grey background. London is one of the three most popular destinations for seven of the nine regions with which it does not share a boundary, the exceptions being the East Midlands and Wales. The only other non-contiguous flows illustrated are those from London to the South West and from Scotland to the South East. London is a favoured destination for nine of the eleven other regions/countries. The next most favoured destinations, with five, are the South East and the North West, which has land boundaries with Wales, Scotland and three English regions as well as being the closest part of England to Northern Ireland.

Chart 10: International Migration Flows, London, 2001 to 2008, thousands

Source: Office for National Statistics Long-Term International Migration There are several definitions of international migration. Long-term migrants intend to stay in the UK (or leave the UK) for at least a year. People meeting this standard United Nations definition are included in the ONS estimates of the resident population. People, who intend to stay (or leave) the UK for less than a year are described as short-term migrants. These moves are not included in resident population estimates. ONS has experimentally estimated short-term migrant flows for England and Wales on the basis of stays of 1-12 months and 3-12 months, with some analysis of purpose of stay. ONS has also issued local authority level estimates relating to 2006-07 for consultation purposes.

Estimates of international migration are drawn from a number of sources, the principal of which is the International Passenger Survey (IPS), which has recently been improved to concentrate more on migrants, as opposed to tourism, and now, with the inclusion of the Republic of Ireland, includes moves with all countries outside the UK. At the regional level IPS immigrant estimates are distributed using data from the Labour Force Survey (LFS). IPS emigrant estimates are distributed by a modelling process. Other sources are UK Borders Agency administrative data on asylum seekers and estimates of switchers, that is persons whose actual length of stay (either in or outside the UK) is different from their original intentions. These three sources together are combined to create the ONS estimates of Long-term International Migration (LTIM). There are also administrative data sets that are useful as indicators of international migration. Of these, National Insurance and National Health Service data are considered below.

The latest estimates of Long-term International Migration relating to London are shown in Chart 3 (p.7). These are from the recently revised mid-year estimates series. ONS data in the LTIM series are available in both calendar year and mid-year to mid-year formats, but have not yet been revised to match the flows used in the mid-year estimates. The main difference is in the distribution of emigrants, but Charts 10 (p.16) and 11 adequately illustrate the main trends of change through the decade. Since 2001 London has seen its share of total immigration to the UK fall from around 37 per cent to 28 per cent. The data on emigration are more difficult to

Since 2001, the share of immigrants coming to the UK and choosing London fell from 37 per cent to 28 per cent. Table 9: National Insurance Registrations by Citizens of the Twelve EU Accession Countries, UK and London, 2002/03 to 2008/09, thousands

| Year | London | UK | London as % of UK | |---------|--------|--------|-------------------| | 2002/03 | 11.3 | 17.7 | 64.2 | | 2003/04 | 18.8 | 28.7 | 65.5 | | 2004/05 | 38.0 | 116.8 | 32.5 | | 2005/06 | 63.7 | 276.7 | 23.0 | | 2006/07 | 68.9 | 317.5 | 21.7 | | 2007/08 | 87.7 | 332.4 | 26.4 | | 2008/09 | 74.4 | 257.0 | 28.9 |

Source: Department for Work and Pensions

Table 10: Asylum Seekers (from the mid-year estimate change analyses), England and London, 2001-02 to 2008-09, thousands

| Year | London | England | London as % of England | |---------|--------|---------|------------------------| | 2001-02 | 43.4 | 85.1 | 51.0 | | 2002-03 | 37.7 | 76.4 | 49.3 | | 2003-04 | 18.6 | 39.8 | 46.8 | | 2004-05 | 12.4 | 28.2 | 43.8 | | 2005-06 | 9.1 | 21.7 | 42.1 | | 2006-07 | 8.1 | 20.1 | 40.3 | | 2007-08 | 8.1 | 21.7 | 37.2 | | 2008-09 | 8.9 | 24.9 | 35.9 |

Source: Office for National Statistics

In terms of numbers of arrivals the NINos show the huge rise in labour migration to London after the eight Eastern European countries (the A8) were admitted to the EU in May 2004. Up to mid-2009 new NINos in London had plateaued, but nationally new registrations have fallen from the 2007-08 peak, partly as a consequence of the reduced demand for labour in the recession. The Flag 4s have continued to rise in London and are broadly at the same level as the Mid-year Estimates/Long-term International Migration. Nationally Flag 4s have fallen from a peak in 2007-08. In terms of the proportion of the inflows to England that are accounted for by London, until 2006-07 all three data sources show a declining share coming to London. Flag 4s are very similar to the Mid-year Estimates/Long-term International Migration but London is having a considerably higher share of NINo registrations. This could be a function of short-term labour migration and/or registration at a first address before moving out of London. The proportions of both NINos and Flag 4s in London have increased in the latest periods. This may also be due to recession effects with reduced demand for labour being seen more outside London.

The impact of all twelve EU accession countries, including Cyprus and Malta in 2004 and Bulgaria and Romania in 2007, on NINo registrations is shown in Table 9. Numbers rose much more rapidly outside London after 2004 and the proportion coming to London fell from 65 per cent to 22 per cent in 2006/07. With total numbers stabilising in 2007/08 and then falling, the proportion coming to London in 2008/09 has increased to 29 per cent.

ONS has recently issued provisional national estimates based on the IPS showing that in the year to the end Chart 12: International Migration Inflows, LTIM, NINos and Flag 4, London, 2001-02 to 2008-09, thousands

Source: Office for National Statistics, Department for Work and Pensions and National Health Service

Chart 13: International Migration Inflows, LTIM, NINos and Flag 4, London as Percentage of England, 2001-02 to 2008-09

Source: Office for National Statistics, Department for Work and Pensions and National Health Service of September 2009 there was the first recorded net emigration of A8 citizens since the time of accession. This was largely as the result of a decline of long-term immigrants from 100 thousand in the year to September 2008 to just 45 thousand.

Asylum seeker applications have fallen considerably since the late 1990s. Table 10 (p.18) shows the estimated numbers coming to London as shown in the ONS mid-year estimate change analyses. The total flow has declined as has London’s share of the England total. The only other data on asylum that identifies London relates to those receiving some kind of support. In March 2010 the Home Office registered 2,775 asylum seekers receiving subsistence support in London and 1,225 receiving accommodation, out of UK totals of 4,015 and 22,735 respectively.

The only available short-term migration (STM) estimates for London were published by ONS as ‘consultation’ statistics in 2009. They relate to inflows in 2006-07 of between 1 and 12 months stay and indicate that London had 60 thousand STM workers, 35 per cent of the England total, and 420 thousand other STMs, 37 per cent of England. Nationally, the majority of the arrivals were having either extended visits with family and friends (40 per cent) or were on holiday (16 per cent). Only 13 per cent came to work.

### Turnover and Churn

The turnover of population in an area due to migration flows of people into and out of the area can have a significant impact on public services, for example the numbers of children joining new schools during the school year, the numbers of households reregistering with local authorities for council tax and the numbers of people changing general practitioners (Table 11). Using the internal and international flows from the mid-year estimate change analysis for 2008-09 it is possible to compare turnover rates at the regional level. It is estimated that over 700 thousand people moved across the London boundary, although this total would double-count any people who moved both into and away from London in the same year. The rate of 93 per thousand resident population compares with 68 in the next highest region - the South East and 44 - the lowest - in the North West. These figures also mean that 47 in every thousand residents in London lived outside London a year earlier.

Turnover rates for lower tier local authorities are relatively higher (Table 12, p.21) since the calculations also incorporate moves between authorities in the same region. The highest local authority turnover rates in 2008-09 were recorded in Cambridge (335) and Oxford (310) with a number of other areas outside London with large student populations also having high turnover. London boroughs had rates between 82 (Havering) and 273 (Islington). Most inner boroughs had rates in excess of 200 while the only other authority outside London above 200 was Manchester. The highest inflow rate in London was 140 per thousand in Islington and the highest outflow was 138 for Hammersmith & Fulham. Both these rates were only exceeded by Cambridge and Oxford.

Moves within each area are called internal churn. Internal churn plus turnover gives overall churn which is a measure of all people who have either moved in or out or within the area. The internal churn is based on statistics from the 2001 Census to account

### Table 11: Population Turnover, 2008-09, thousands, rates

| Region | Turnover (000s) | Turnover Rate per 1000 | Inflow Rate per 1000 | Outflow Rate per 1000 | |-------------------------|-----------------|------------------------|----------------------|-----------------------| | | Internal (UK) | International | Total | | | North East | 89.3 | 28.8 | 118.1 | 46 | 25 | 21 | | North West | 227.5 | 73.3 | 300.8 | 44 | 22 | 21 | | Yorkshire and the Humber| 210.8 | 72.1 | 282.9 | 54 | 29 | 25 | | East Midlands | 221.6 | 36.6 | 258.2 | 58 | 30 | 28 | | West Midlands | 211.4 | 59.7 | 271.1 | 50 | 25 | 25 | | East | 275.2 | 86.4 | 361.6 | 63 | 34 | 29 | | London | 442.4 | 272.9 | 715.3 | 93 | 47 | 46 | | South East | 435.4 | 138.3 | 573.7 | 68 | 37 | 32 | | South West | 253.3 | 61.8 | 315.0 | 60 | 32 | 29 | | Wales | 111.5 | 25.8 | 137.2 | 46 | 24 | 22 |

Source: Office for National Statistics

### Table 12: Population Turnover and Churn, London Boroughs, 2008-09, thousands and rates

| Borough | Turnover (000s) | Turnover Rate (per 1000) | Inflow Rate (per 1000) | Outflow Rate (per 1000) | Internal Churn Rate (per 1000) | Churn Rate (per 1000) | |-------------------------------|-----------------|--------------------------|------------------------|-------------------------|--------------------------------|-----------------------| | City of London | 1.7 | 1.3 | 3.0 | 264 | 138 | 126 | 20 | 284 | | Barking and Dagenham | 21.8 | 3.7 | 25.6 | 147 | 79 | 68 | 42 | 189 | | Barnet | 40.8 | 10.1 | 51.0 | 150 | 78 | 72 | 47 | 196 | | Bexley | 19.7 | 1.6 | 21.3 | 95 | 47 | 47 | 39 | 133 | | Brent | 39.1 | 10.5 | 49.6 | 194 | 92 | 102 | 50 | 244 | | Bromley | 28.5 | 2.7 | 31.2 | 101 | 52 | 49 | 44 | 145 | | Camden | 43.6 | 17.0 | 60.6 | 265 | 138 | 126 | 49 | 313 | | Croydon | 37.8 | 7.4 | 45.2 | 132 | 65 | 67 | 53 | 185 | | Ealing | 44.7 | 14.8 | 59.5 | 189 | 96 | 93 | 50 | 240 | | Enfield | 34.8 | 4.2 | 39.0 | 135 | 66 | 68 | 49 | 184 | | Greenwich | 32.4 | 7.6 | 40.1 | 178 | 89 | 89 | 50 | 229 | | Hackney | 36.8 | 6.5 | 43.3 | 202 | 101 | 101 | 47 | 249 | | Hammersmith and Fulham | 34.5 | 11.3 | 45.8 | 271 | 133 | 138 | 50 | 321 | | Haringey | 40.6 | 7.3 | 47.9 | 212 | 100 | 113 | 49 | 261 | | Harrow | 28.5 | 5.4 | 33.9 | 150 | 77 | 73 | 40 | 190 | | Havering | 18.0 | 1.2 | 19.2 | 82 | 44 | 38 | 36 | 119 | | Hillingdon | 30.8 | 5.3 | 36.2 | 139 | 74 | 65 | 51 | 190 | | Hounslow | 33.2 | 10.7 | 43.9 | 189 | 97 | 92 | 47 | 236 | | Islington | 42.0 | 9.8 | 51.8 | 273 | 140 | 132 | 39 | 312 | | Kensington and Chelsea | 23.4 | 13.9 | 37.2 | 218 | 102 | 117 | 42 | 261 | | Kingston upon Thames | 24.5 | 4.9 | 29.4 | 177 | 91 | 86 | 54 | 231 | | Lambeth | 57.8 | 12.4 | 70.2 | 249 | 122 | 127 | 48 | 296 | | Lewisham | 41.2 | 6.4 | 47.6 | 181 | 89 | 92 | 51 | 232 | | Merton | 30.1 | 8.7 | 38.8 | 190 | 98 | 91 | 40 | 230 | | Newham | 40.0 | 8.7 | 48.7 | 201 | 89 | 112 | 52 | 253 | | Redbridge | 33.6 | 6.0 | 39.6 | 149 | 77 | 71 | 36 | 185 | | Richmond upon Thames | 25.8 | 5.2 | 31.0 | 165 | 82 | 82 | 49 | 214 | | Southwark | 49.6 | 10.7 | 60.3 | 212 | 104 | 108 | 45 | 257 | | Sutton | 19.3 | 2.2 | 21.5 | 113 | 60 | 53 | 48 | 161 | | Tower Hamlets | 39.6 | 13.5 | 53.1 | 230 | 125 | 105 | 49 | 279 | | Waltham Forest | 30.4 | 8.3 | 38.7 | 174 | 87 | 87 | 53 | 227 | | Wandsworth | 59.3 | 14.4 | 73.8 | 259 | 128 | 131 | 61 | 320 | | Westminster | 40.8 | 19.1 | 59.9 | 241 | 123 | 119 | 45 | 287 |

Source: Office for National Statistics, mid-year estimates for the 350 thousand persons who moved in 2000-01 without changing their borough of residence. Internal churn rates varied from 36 per thousand in Havering and Redbridge to 61 per thousand in Wandsworth. The overall churn rates varied in 2008-09 from 119 per thousand in Havering to 321 in Hammersmith & Fulham. The sum of internal churn and the inflow rate is the proportion of the population of a borough that lived elsewhere a year ago, for London the median value of the boroughs is 140 per thousand, but this rises to almost 190 in Wandsworth.

**Demographic Projections**

As part of the preparation for the draft replacement London Plan the GLA prepared demographic projections for London boroughs. These included population by age, gender and ethnicity, households by age, gender and marital status of the household representative (as well as by five types of household), and economically active residents by age and gender. These have been converted to ward level population projections by age and gender. GLA projections differ from ONS subnational population projections and the associated CLG household projections, as the GLA uses actual and planned housing development as the lead indicator of population change since 2001. ONS relies on using recent trends in the estimated local migration levels constrained to national assumptions about international flows. Table 13 shows the main results of the GLA projection, which between 2011 and 2031 is based on the London Plan borough housing targets amounting to an average of 33,400 new homes per year. Table 14 (p.23) shows the main results for the boroughs.

Between 2011 and 2031 London’s population is projected to increase by 1.02 million persons, equivalent to 13 per cent. Households are expected to increase by 667 thousand, or 20 per cent. The difference in the rates of change is a reflection of the 6 per cent decline in average household size from 2.32 to 2.19.

The structure of household change is dominated by the 450 thousand increase in one-person households that accounts for 68 per cent of the total household growth.

The resident labour force has been projected using borough level age-specific economic activity rates which are based on the 2001 Census and improved according to ONS national projections until 2020. The rates are then held constant. Between

______________________________________________________________________

**Table 13: Summary of Demographic Projections for the London Plan, 2006 to 2031, thousands**

| | 2006 | 2011 | 2016 | 2021 | 2026 | 2031 | |----------------------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------| | Married Couples | 1,037.2 | 964.2 | 909.3 | 869.5 | 840.1 | 833.9 | | Cohabiting Couples | 333.1 | 400.3 | 455.8 | 503.3 | 547.4 | 584.3 | | Lone Parents | 317.7 | 347.8 | 375.4 | 395.5 | 410.7 | 425.1 | | Other (2+ Adults) | 340.0 | 357.7 | 378.7 | 399.8 | 420.9 | 440.8 | | One-person | 1,146.5 | 1,252.7 | 1,370.5 | 1,488.4 | 1,604.3 | 1,706.2 | | Total Households | 3,174.5 | 3,322.8 | 3,489.6 | 3,656.5 | 3,823.4 | 3,990.3 | | Household Population | 7,434.1 | 7,713.7 | 7,983.1 | 8,242.7 | 8,493.6 | 8,729.7 | | Average Household Size | 2.34 | 2.32 | 2.29 | 2.25 | 2.22 | 2.19 | | Communal Population | 92.8 | 93.1 | 93.3 | 94.1 | 96.1 | 99.1 | | Total Population | 7,526.9 | 7,806.8 | 8,076.4 | 8,336.9 | 8,589.7 | 8,828.8 | | Economically Active | 3,902.0 | 4,071.2 | 4,231.2 | 4,372.6 | 4,493.0 | 4,593.0 |

Source: Greater London Authority, 2009 Round of Demographic Projections Table 14: Summary of Demographic Projections for the London Plan, London Boroughs, 2011 and 2031, thousands

| Borough | 2011 Population | 2011 Households | 2011 Economically Active | 2031 Population | 2031 Households | 2031 Economically Active | |--------------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|--------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|--------------------------| | City of London | 9.7 | 5.5 | 6.1 | 12.9 | 7.7 | 8.4 | | Barking and Dagenham | 177.8 | 73.8 | 81.7 | 229.7 | 103.9 | 107.8 | | Barnet | 330.6 | 134.4 | 168.7 | 404.2 | 179.5 | 209.5 | | Bexley | 217.4 | 92.6 | 113.2 | 224.9 | 99.3 | 114.6 | | Brent | 279.6 | 108.7 | 138.6 | 307.7 | 130.0 | 152.2 | | Bromley | 302.4 | 132.5 | 157.6 | 317.0 | 143.9 | 162.5 | | Camden | 210.9 | 98.8 | 114.9 | 236.1 | 112.1 | 127.0 | | Croydon | 342.9 | 149.6 | 178.0 | 377.1 | 176.2 | 191.8 | | Ealing | 319.5 | 124.9 | 164.4 | 347.9 | 142.7 | 175.7 | | Enfield | 294.2 | 118.7 | 144.7 | 312.4 | 129.9 | 149.9 | | Greenwich | 238.1 | 107.0 | 116.2 | 313.8 | 158.9 | 157.7 | | Hackney | 231.5 | 98.9 | 111.6 | 265.7 | 122.1 | 132.8 | | Hammersmith and Fulham | 180.6 | 80.6 | 102.4 | 197.1 | 92.9 | 114.1 | | Haringey | 237.2 | 98.8 | 123.0 | 265.2 | 115.2 | 140.5 | | Harrow | 220.7 | 85.7 | 115.2 | 227.8 | 92.7 | 115.9 | | Havering | 231.6 | 97.1 | 120.2 | 272.4 | 121.8 | 142.1 | | Hillingdon | 261.8 | 106.6 | 136.9 | 284.6 | 119.0 | 145.4 | | Hounslow | 237.2 | 94.1 | 123.9 | 253.8 | 103.6 | 128.4 | | Islington | 208.8 | 99.0 | 114.8 | 242.4 | 122.4 | 135.4 | | Kensington and Chelsea | 169.9 | 83.1 | 92.6 | 185.6 | 94.8 | 101.7 | | Kingston upon Thames | 155.3 | 65.1 | 85.5 | 169.6 | 72.6 | 90.1 | | Lambeth | 300.2 | 131.6 | 169.0 | 336.9 | 156.7 | 192.2 | | Lewisham | 272.7 | 116.3 | 147.4 | 316.6 | 138.4 | 169.9 | | Merton | 198.7 | 84.1 | 107.2 | 207.5 | 90.5 | 107.9 | | Newham | 267.9 | 102.6 | 120.4 | 353.6 | 152.6 | 172.2 | | Redbridge | 258.8 | 100.5 | 129.1 | 283.7 | 115.7 | 139.9 | | Richmond upon Thames | 186.4 | 80.8 | 101.7 | 193.9 | 85.7 | 103.3 | | Southwark | 285.5 | 123.2 | 151.2 | 353.6 | 163.3 | 188.8 | | Sutton | 185.9 | 81.0 | 101.4 | 191.8 | 85.2 | 101.1 | | Tower Hamlets | 248.7 | 107.5 | 120.2 | 332.7 | 165.2 | 168.0 | | Waltham Forest | 229.4 | 96.3 | 112.9 | 248.2 | 111.5 | 119.5 | | Wandsworth | 297.5 | 133.3 | 176.8 | 331.6 | 158.9 | 196.2 | | Westminster | 217.2 | 109.9 | 123.6 | 231.1 | 125.3 | 130.6 | | London | 7,806.8 | 3,322.8 | 4,071.2 | 8,828.8 | 3,990.3 | 4,593.0 |

Source: Greater London Authority 2009, Round of Demographic Projections 2011 and 2031 there is a 520 thousand increase in the resident labour force aged 16-74, equivalent to 13 per cent. The female contribution to the labour force rises by over 310 thousand and is 60 per cent of the total growth.

Between 2011 and 2031 the growth in population is seen at most age groups (Chart 14, p.22). The only exception is the under-5s, which reflects the downward revision in national fertility assumptions. The changes demonstrate both a distinct ageing pattern, particularly with an increase of over 400 thousand persons between 45 and 64 as well as a significant increase in the child population, with 115 thousand more children of school age (4-15). The elderly population is projected to grow particularly fast. The over 65s are projected to increase by 34 per cent, or nearly 300 thousand, to reach 1.17 million by 2031. The over 90s are expected to almost double to 96 thousand.

Table 15 compares the London Plan projection for London with the latest ONS and CLG projections of population and households. The London Plan projections followed the trend in the original series of ONS mid-year estimates that were superseded in May 2010; therefore the results for 2011 are quite close to the ONS/CLG 2006-based projections. The upward revisions to the mid-year estimates informed the ONS 2008-based projections so the starting population and the migration trajectory were both higher. Overall the change in the London Plan projection is a little less than the ONS/CLG 2006-based figures but somewhat lower than the ONS 2008-based projections, which have not yet been converted to households by CLG. Although the London Plan projections followed ONS mid-year estimate trends for London this was not done for each borough, hence the borough projections for 2011 are in several instances quite different to the ONS mid-year estimates for 2009 shown in Table 16 (p.25).

Table 15: Comparison of Population and Household Projections for London, 2011 and 2031, thousands

| | 2011 Population | 2011 Households | 2031 Population | 2031 Households | Percentage Change Population | Percentage Change Households | |----------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------------------|-----------------------------| | Greater London Authority, London Plan | 7,807 | 3,323 | 8,829 | 3,990 | 13.1 | 20.1 | | Office for National Statistics/ Communities and Local Government, 2006-based | 7,817 | 3,337 | 8,858 | 4,016 | 13.3 | 20.3 | | Office for National Statistics, 2008-based | 7,868 | - | 9,083 | - | 15.4 | - |

Sources: Greater London Authority, 2009 Round of Demographic Projections. Office for National Statistics / Communities and Local Government, 2006-based Subnational Projections. Office for National Statistics, 2008-based Subnational Projections.

### Table 16: Population Estimates by Broad Age Groups, London Boroughs, 2009, thousands

| Borough | Total | 0-15 | 16-Retirement Age¹ | Retirement Age+ | Percentage of Total | |-------------------------------|-------|------|--------------------|-----------------|---------------------| | City of London | 11.5 | 0.8 | 9.3 | 1.4 | 7.0 | | Barking and Dagenham | 175.6 | 43.4 | 108.6 | 23.6 | 24.7 | | Barnet | 343.1 | 69.5 | 217.5 | 56.1 | 20.3 | | Bexley | 225.9 | 45.3 | 137.8 | 42.8 | 20.1 | | Brent | 255.5 | 51.5 | 166.0 | 38.0 | 20.2 | | Bromley | 310.2 | 60.7 | 188.8 | 60.7 | 19.6 | | Camden | 231.2 | 35.5 | 170.5 | 25.3 | 15.4 | | Croydon | 342.8 | 71.1 | 218.6 | 53.1 | 20.7 | | Ealing | 316.6 | 60.5 | 214.3 | 41.9 | 19.1 | | Enfield | 291.2 | 63.1 | 182.7 | 45.5 | 21.7 | | Greenwich | 226.1 | 48.0 | 147.8 | 30.4 | 21.2 | | Hackney | 216.0 | 46.8 | 147.4 | 21.8 | 21.7 | | Hammersmith and Fulham | 169.7 | 28.6 | 120.5 | 20.7 | 16.9 | | Haringey | 225.5 | 44.3 | 155.7 | 25.5 | 19.6 | | Harrow | 228.1 | 43.8 | 146.6 | 37.7 | 19.2 | | Havering | 234.1 | 44.3 | 141.4 | 48.5 | 18.9 | | Hillingdon | 262.5 | 53.4 | 168.5 | 40.6 | 20.3 | | Hounslow | 234.2 | 45.3 | 159.6 | 29.4 | 19.3 | | Islington | 191.8 | 30.4 | 141.3 | 20.1 | 15.8 | | Kensington and Chelsea | 169.9 | 27.4 | 113.8 | 28.7 | 16.1 | | Kingston upon Thames | 166.7 | 29.8 | 113.1 | 23.8 | 17.9 | | Lambeth | 283.3 | 49.0 | 207.0 | 27.3 | 17.3 | | Lewisham | 264.5 | 52.6 | 182.2 | 29.7 | 19.9 | | Merton | 206.4 | 37.9 | 140.2 | 28.4 | 18.4 | | Newham | 241.2 | 59.9 | 157.7 | 23.6 | 24.8 | | Redbridge | 267.7 | 57.6 | 170.9 | 39.2 | 21.5 | | Richmond upon Thames | 189.0 | 37.0 | 122.8 | 29.1 | 19.6 | | Southwark | 285.6 | 50.0 | 205.9 | 29.7 | 17.5 | | Sutton | 192.2 | 38.3 | 122.2 | 31.7 | 19.9 | | Tower Hamlets | 234.8 | 45.8 | 170.0 | 19.1 | 19.5 | | Waltham Forest | 224.3 | 48.9 | 147.2 | 28.2 | 21.8 | | Wandsworth | 286.6 | 46.8 | 208.3 | 31.5 | 16.3 | | Westminster | 249.4 | 31.7 | 185.7 | 32.0 | 12.7 | | London | 7,753.6 | 1,498.7 | 5,189.8 | 1,065.0 | 19.3 | 66.9 | 13.7 |

¹Retirement Age is taken as 60 for females and 65 for males.

Source: Office for National Statistics, mid-year estimates Notes

Mid-year estimates (Tables 1, 2, 3, 16, and Chart 3)

The estimated resident population of an area includes all people who usually live there, whatever their nationality. People arriving into an area from outside the UK are only included in the population estimates if their total stay in the UK is 12 months or more. Visitors and short-term migrants (those who enter the UK for less than 12 months) are not included. Similarly, people who leave the UK are only excluded from the population estimates if they remain outside the UK for 12 months or more. This is consistent with the United Nations recommended definition of an international long-term migrant. Members of UK and non-UK armed forces stationed in the UK are included in the population and UK forces stationed outside the UK are excluded. Students are taken to be resident at their term time address. ‘Other changes’ includes changes in population due to changes in the number of armed forces (both non-UK and UK) and their dependants resident in the UK. In calculating the international migration component of the population estimates, ONS uses the United Nations recommended definition of an international long-term migrant (someone who changes their country of residence for at least 12 months). This component does not include short-term migrants and visitors. The other component of population change is ‘Natural Change’ - the number of births less the number of deaths.

Total Fertility Rate (Table 4)

Age-specific birth rates for the United Kingdom have been calculated from all births registered in the UK, i.e. including births to mothers usually resident outside the UK apart from those to the non-residents of Northern Ireland, which are excluded. Data relate to year of occurrence in England and Wales, and year of registration in Scotland and Northern Ireland. The total fertility rate (TFR) is the average number of live children that a woman would bear if the female population experienced the Age Specific Fertility Rate (ASFRs) of the calendar year in question throughout their childbearing life-span.

Standardised mortality ratio (Table 5)

The standardised mortality ratio (SMR) compares overall mortality in a region with that for the UK. The ratio expresses the actual number of deaths in a region as a percentage of the hypothetical number that would have occurred if the region’s population had experienced the sex/age-specific rates of the UK that year.

Inter-regional migration (Figure 1, Table 6, 7, 8, Chart 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9)

Estimates for internal population movements are based on the movement of NHS doctors’ patients between former Health Authorities (HAs) in England and Wales and Area Health Boards (AHBs) in Scotland and Northern Ireland. The figures provide a detailed indicator of population movement within the UK. However, they should not be regarded as a perfect measure of migration as there is variation in the delay between a person moving and registering with a new doctor. Additionally, some moves may not result in a re-registration, i.e. individuals may migrate again before registering with a doctor. Conversely, there may be others who move and re-register several times in a year. Not everyone registers with a doctor so their movement will not be recorded.

International migration (Chart 3, 10, 11, 12, 13)

The richest source of information on international migrants comes from the International Passenger Survey (IPS), which is a sample survey of passengers arriving at, and departing from, the main United Kingdom air and sea ports and Channel Tunnel. This survey provides migration estimates based on respondents’ intended length of stay in the UK or abroad and excludes most persons seeking asylum and some dependents of such asylum seekers. More can be found about the IPS from the following link: www.statistics.gov.uk/ssd/surveys/international_passenger_survey.asp.

Population Turnover Rate (Table 11, 12)

To help users who wish to compare different areas the migration estimates are converted into rates using the average population estimates of 2001 and mid-year 2007. An inflow rate of 141 therefore means that for every 1,000 people estimated to be living in the area at the end of the year, 141 people lived outside the area, one year previously. The rates include international migrants (people moving to or from the UK). This map shows the ONS definition of inner / outer London. The replacement London Plan uses a different definition.